Funny to see Mastodonites complain about free speech when the main fediverse has one of the most strict speech policies I've seen online.
It's the hypocrisy which is the issue there.
Would you be OK if Twitter just said, “all legal speech can be up, even doxxing since that’s not illegal?”
It's just more obvious for Musk since 1) he prioritized himself over doing a more general sweep including more than what affects him alone and 2) he has been obnoxiously vocal for multiple years now, painting a massive target and begging the public to troll him.
He needs to show he's a trustworthy moderator who won't behave like this, and his behavior makes it pretty hard to believe he will be.
He went completely against that and journalists that reported on it when he banned the account and the journalists.
Keep in mind that none of this was "doxxing". It's publicly available information what Elon's plane is and where it's flying. He just woke up on the wrong side of bed and decided to ban, perhaps to see how far he could push things and whether his "fans" would support him.
He then starts a Twitter poll to democratise the decision to unban the journalists. The result is to unban them now. He didn't like that result and did another poll, except with the news that he was doing it again, the poll was even more in favour of unbanning them now.
He's a hypocrite deciding what to do based on what some brown nosing fan tweets him or what he dreamt of that night.
99% of a dox is taking public information from obscure sources and making it easily accessible in one place. Doxxing can be sharing public information about someone without their permission. Being public doesn't make it not doxxing.
Argument is invalid.
This is absolutely not doxxing.
Pull the other one.
Pretty much every platform (including Twitter) considers that to be doxxing.
You don't get to make up your own definitions for words.
https://photos.app.goo.gl/Uxwbo7bhebMnLrpn8
(For the bystanders: There is no other included letter or note, just this unsolicited package containing a bare, although apparently new and unused, surgical mask with no explaination and no known-to-me sender. The string was cut unwittingly while cutting open the envelope.)
This conversation: 12-18
Sent: 12-18
Origin: anonymous fulfillment service
https://branchwarehousing.com/
So you have uncovered some never-was-covered public data from my full-real-name-middle-initial-and-all handle, and proved that some people out there are willing to mis-use public data, and that you are one of them, and I am not.
Strange point to want to make.
I wonder if HN has any sort of official stance on that sort of action @dang ?
I keep seeing this.
Property tax information and license plate information are also "publicly available" in most areas.
That doesn't make posting someone's home address, or the make, model, and plate number of their car somehow "not doxxing".
Which is true, but also, I don't care, and I'm happy with it, because we're better off and other speech flourishes.
However, a handful of Mastodon instances, mostly ones used by frequently harassed groups, banned dozens of other instances. This was one of their major selling points to their users: "Join here, and we'll provide a curated experience with fewer harassers."
No instance that I saw banned linking to Twitter, and I can't think of any instance that banned journalists from major mainstream papers.
But the thing about Mastodon is that if you really want to talk to Nazi wannabes, you can always set up your own instance. However, many people may choose not to talk with you, because many people dislike wannabe Nazis and their buddies and don't invite them to the cool parties. Almost every worthwhile social space has always had rules about who's not invited.
Elon Musk has every right to shout loudly about freedom of speech, and then ban journalists and links to competitors. And his critics have every right to mock him for this.
All the instances in the main fediverse have practically the same moderation rules and if you don't apply them to your instance they ban you and stop federating with you.
A private party is not listening when they don't want to; And to be clear, you say that this is an intolerable imposition on your free speech?
small private forums also had some draconian moderation (well, some of them did for sure), but the key point was that they were small, targeted and competitive with each other.
Too draconian, and people leave; too loose and people abuse.
The thing is, you kinda know what you're in for with small forums (or in this case mastadon instances), the servers themselves do more to say what they're targeting and what niche they have; they do not pretend to be an apolitical platform or to not have opinions.
That's the major difference, you can go to other Mastadon instances and find people you enjoy being around. With Twitter there are some hidden "rules" (which used to align with the US west coast ideals, and now seem to align more with the trumpy right-wing thing), with Mastadon it's more likely that you know what the rules are.
Mastodon instances are all private property. They are clubs that can be run according to the wishes of the owners.
> You can't prosecute us for things that are published as we are a platform for communication, we're not responsible for what's communicated!
> We can moderate and ban you for saying things we disagree with based on what we interpret our "rules" to be (in social media's case: whatever the West-Coast likes and Copyright violations)
With Mastodon (or phpbb forums of yore) the former is false, so it's at least internally consistent, and of course you have the choice to move away, it's not 1 moderation style for the whole planet across all cultures.
We have that, with public roads and parks.
"Here's the rules: don't litter, don't get naked, don't yell and follow people"
What I'm saying is that you can be one or the other, but not both.
Mastodon doesn't pretend to be anything other than private property.
Twitter pretends to be a public place, like a park or a giant square.
Establishing clear policies and guidelines is critical. Musk's mistake is making things up to suit his personal feelings as he goes along.